Oklahoma Lawmaker Wants State to Legislate Exemption from the Recently-Passed Federal Hate Crimes Bill
Comparing homosexuality to necrophilia, Oklahoma State Sen. Steve Russell (R-Oklahoma City) plans to introduce a bill that would exempt the state from having to abide by the recently passed Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act on the basis of the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The 10th amendment reads, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people."
Says Russell, who is upset that the bill was attached to a Department of Defense bill: “The bill gives the federal government power that was not given to them in the Constitution. I am aware of the supremacy of the federal government over state governments, but the federal requirements are vague enough for us to make actions. We just have to be very careful on how we proceed.”
Russell says he considered finding a way of still taking the $5 million in federal funds that the Hate Crimes Act provides state agencies but decided against it because it would "be a compromise in the values of his bill."
The Oklahoma Daily reports: "Russell said because the government has decided to intervene on issues of morality, he is worried that religious leaders who speak out against any lifestyle could be imprisoned for their speech. 'The law is very vague to begin with,' Russell said. 'Sexual orientation is a very vague word that could be extended to extremes like necrophilia.' Russell said he is also concerned if someone is attacked and killed for his or her sexual orientation, the suspect could pass the blame onto a religious leader who preached out against the lifestyle of the victim who was attacked."
Said Russell: “The federal government should not be creating a special class of people, and that is just what they did when they passed and signed this bill. All crimes against another person have some level of hate in them, and people can be assured that our laws that protect people against crimes such as murder are sufficient to protect everyone.”




Please, total closet case.
Posted by: secretagentman | Nov 17, 2009 11:52:01 AM
Disgusting ---
How would this man feel if a politician grandstanded for votes by trying to get an excemption from Hate Crimes Law for those who shoot Religious Leaders ?
So he wants his side protected - but not the other side --- all for votes and powwer.
Posted by: Tony X | Nov 17, 2009 11:53:18 AM
When 7th graders can be singled out for special torment by their classmates for their perceived "sexual orientation," that pretty much means all people--including this dunderhead--know that GLBT people form a "special class." There is nothing vague about it. And hey, I have no problem prosecuting clergy for incitement to violence in addition to the perpetrators of hate violence.
Posted by: Josh | Nov 17, 2009 11:55:16 AM
Look at this zombie. He knows of which he speaks. Anytime he has sex it's necrophilia.
Posted by: GM | Nov 17, 2009 11:59:16 AM
The government has always intervened on issues of morality. That's why murder is illegal.
Posted by: Joe | Nov 17, 2009 12:00:17 PM
To SecretAgentMan...
I thought the same thing just seeing that photo of him!
That little smirk on his face screams "I take it in the bum!"
Posted by: CHRIS | Nov 17, 2009 12:04:38 PM
Be real clear who this douche is. He's one of those really, really wackadoodle far-right people who get elected to office because they attract constituents who collect guns, think the Bible is the constitution of the U.S. (and I'm a man who reads and believes in the Bible but knows the difference), hate blacks, gays, and anything non-like them, have no money and no power but continue to vote for the party that keeps that keeps them that way. This particular retarded senator constantly says stupid shit -- most recently notable that Obama's speech to school kids was something we would see in North Korea or from Saddamn Hussien (that it was indoctrination not the President of the United States telling kids to stay in school...)
This guy is a douche of the nth magnitude. Like his fellow Republican from that same state, Sally "I'm the second dumbest person in the U.S. Senate behind Michelle Bachman" Kern, they have some bizarre governmental ideology that seems to come from the Jim Jones school of religious fervor.
Will this pass in Oklahoma? Doubtful. All it does is salivate his crazy, tin-foil hate, God-is-coming, base who call themselves Christians (but don't seem to know jack about Jesus Christ) and Americans (and again, don't seem to know much about this country...it's founding or the separation of church and state.) This kind of guy thinks that certain classes of people shouldn't be protected from hate crimes but that hate-spewing religious zealots who climb up on a pulpit and use a the Lord of Peace's name to incited hatred and violence should be protected. Amazing dicotomy, isn't it?
This senator served time in Afghanistan and Iraq. I commend him for that. But that doesn't make him less evil, less of a retard, less of a douche, less of a cretin. He is all of those, just one who joined the military and served our country thusly. But all the medals in the world don't make someone good. Don't make someone just. Don't make someone sane. This guy is none of those.
He's another fringe dweller who gets elected to office...which happens more and more because moderated do not attract people to the polls in primaries. Crazy people do. The crazy base comes out and the moderate base is usually dilluted between a few candidates and they lose. So you get people like this in office.
Hang your heads Oklahomans...you're electing idiots. And they are embarassing you. It's your job to send them back to obscurity and make them jokes. The rest of the country is laughing already.
Posted by: Bart | Nov 17, 2009 12:11:06 PM
What a poofter! Miss girl, you need to get your head together and get back on the right side of the fence before you hurt yourself (or some nice woman). He even has the McGreevey whitewall haircut! Clueless Republicans!
Posted by: hall | Nov 17, 2009 12:11:15 PM
It would be nice if we didn't have to create a class distinction, such as we do with hate crime legislation, but since our law enforcement officials don't do their sworn duty and equally investigate and prosecute crimes against some classes of people they deem to be less worthy, we're stuck with having to enact hate crime laws.
As for preachers who incite congregations to go out and do misdeeds... pillories might be a good place to start...
Posted by: Burt | Nov 17, 2009 12:16:03 PM
I hate living in Oklahoma.
Posted by: oklahoman | Nov 17, 2009 12:17:04 PM
If a religious leader incites someone to kill someone else, then they should be arrested and tried as an accessory to murder. Just because you are a preacher or an imam doesn't mean you can get away with telling someone else to go out and kill homosexuals, African-Americans, Jews, etc.
Posted by: homer | Nov 17, 2009 12:22:57 PM
Par for the course for Oklahoma politicians. They'll be licking the skanky assholes of right wing preachers right up until the rapture.
I'm thankful every day that I escaped Oklahoma in the early 90s.
Posted by: The Milkman | Nov 17, 2009 12:26:21 PM
So what's new? It's just another white guy legislating our rights away. Basically, another Tuesday in the US.
Posted by: sugarrhill | Nov 17, 2009 12:26:25 PM
Unfortunately, I graduated from high school with this guy in 1981, and knew him pretty well. He was obsessed with two subjects: the Southern Baptist Church and everything about war (especially Nazi Germany and Hitler). He actually made several students and teachers, including fellow Southern Baptists, extremely uncomfortable due to his religious fervor.
Our senior year he developed an unexpected interest in student government and managed to get elected class president in a lackluster race. He immediately lost interest and was totally incompetent, and our class suffered, not just for that year, but to this day, since the senior class president was supposed to be in charge of organizing reunions. No doubt he would say that Jesus told him it was to prepare him for bigger things.
I would put nothing past him.
Posted by: VoiceOfDoom | Nov 17, 2009 12:37:07 PM
this Asshat's proposed bill is so trivial it doesn't need to be noticed. Federal laws have defined and prosecuted on the basis of moral judgments for decades. What does he think kiddy porn laws are all about ? And, the Matthew Shepard law permits federal prosecution precedence.. and requires specific punishment and incarceration requirements for the convicted perpetrators of anti-gay based crimes.. it doesn't create hate crimes legislation.
Posted by: jake | Nov 17, 2009 12:38:58 PM
great comment, BART, explaining how right-wing loons get into office. Lord, please make Sarah run for president....please. It will tear the Republican Party apart....please.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Nov 17, 2009 12:40:39 PM
Oklahoma is full of wonderful, gracious people...unfortunately, I think I've met all of them, and the rest of them are like this trash. Let's be very clear that no one I know would ever vote for a piece of shit like this, and my part of town has an openly gay legislator who fights the good fight every day.
Posted by: clint | Nov 17, 2009 12:42:53 PM
I may be in the minority of gay men, but I've always been a little hesitant about the push for hate crime legislation. Crime is crime, regardless of the motive, and you find yourself in very muddy territory very quickly when the government begins regulating thought. It sounds to me like Mr. Russell isn't against the bill itself, just the way it was passed (attached to a completely unrelated bill) and he actually has a pretty valid point. It is very legitimate to question whether the scope of the bill falls under the power of the federal government according to the constitution.
Posted by: Josh | Nov 17, 2009 12:45:55 PM
necrophilia and beating a dead horse much as random comments made on-air that would invoke the death of supposed "faggot" much like those late-breaking news related to levi johnston not going full-frontal receiving a boo/hiss or boo-hoo in the problems facing print media -- or is it a shift to another title. necrophilia?? i always love these extremes from those far-reaching corner ether forums that i've never encountered. i mean, who knew there were baptists into such things??
Posted by: richard | Nov 17, 2009 12:50:07 PM
Why do politicians and pundits get let off the hook so easily these days? There are those, like Huckabee, who simply claim the Bible is absolute truth and infallible, and we give them a pass to continue on their tirade (Kudos to Jon Stewart for calling Christianity a choice to Huckabee's face).
Then more importantly, we let some moron go on about all crime are hate crimes. NO THEY ARE NOT! Many crimes, especially when they invoke robbery as a hate crime, is more often a crime of convenience. Joe Crackhead did not just rob the 7-11 on 12th and Broadway because he hated 7-11, he was nearby had an urge and a pistol. Beating someone to death, dismembering them, then attempting to burn them is a hate crime - whether the victim was gay straight religious, etc.
This politician in Oklahoma is a perfect example of why we need a federal hate crime act because if it were up to him, he would sweep any violent attack of gay Oklahomans under the rug where he feels we belong.
Posted by: jonny | Nov 17, 2009 1:02:26 PM
"All crimes against another person have some level of hate in them." So says OK State Sen. Steve Russell. Of course, that stupid statement can be refuted by any reputable psychiatrist or criminal profiler in 30 seconds or less. What is worrisome about this is that various right-wing, judicial-activist organizations are actually working on legal strategies to litigate through the federal court system all the way to the Supreme Court the alleged "meaning" of the Tenth Amendment. This is a big, big issue for the American right-wingers right now. It is discussed regularly on right-wing "shout" radio. It has been written about in various print and Internet outlets that cater to "conservative thought". Conservative "think tanks" have published papers on the "meaning" of the Tenth Amendment and how it could be used to negate laws and mandates legislated through Congress and signed into law by the President. The temptation is to dismiss Sen. Russell and his proposed legislation as another wing-nut moment. However, it is NOT beyond the realm of possibility that such proposed legislation could be passed by the OK legislature and signed into law by OK's governor. Ignore the wing-nuts (and their deeds and actions since Mr. Obama became our president) at your own risk.
Posted by: mike | Nov 17, 2009 1:05:07 PM
@Josh
I used to know Steve Russell, and he is doing this because he is a religious bigot.
You should do some research about why these laws are necessary, and why they are constitutional. You can start here:
http://www.adl.org/99hatecrime/intro.asp
Posted by: VoiceOfDoom | Nov 17, 2009 1:07:39 PM
Well if this Bigot/Hater feels this way, then I wonder how he feels about Slavery, Interacial Marriages, and other protected groups in the hate crimes bill? Maybe we should leave those laws up to the states too? This guy is scum.
Posted by: DairyQueen | Nov 17, 2009 1:08:58 PM
This bitch looks as Gay as the day is long...
Posted by: Jim | Nov 17, 2009 1:09:02 PM
Isn't religious affiliation a protected class in previous iterations of the hate crimes act? I thought it was, yet that is never mentioned, so maybe we should act to remove that protection and see who starts shouting.
Posted by: jonny | Nov 17, 2009 1:14:05 PM